Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

EverQuest NextFollow

#1 Dec 13 2011 at 8:03 AM Rating: Good
5 posts
Has anyone heard anything recently regarding EverQuest Next? Also what is everyone's biggest desire/want for this game?
____________________________
Spitsavelli
#2 Dec 13 2011 at 5:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
Avatar
**
477 posts
I don't think that there is a timetable for the release of EQ Next yet, but it is supposed to be on the drawing boards as a future mmorpg, according to a release from SOE some months ago iirc.

I personally wouldn't ever leave EQ1 for EQ Next unless they allowed EQ vets to move their heavily invested(timewise) characters to the new game (and if there was an exodus from EQ1 to EQ Next). Though, that would be possible only if EQ Next was similar to the original EQ in characters,classes, rulesets etc. Or if it was designed to be EQ1 on a technically modern platform.

The ironic thing is if EQ Next is all of the above I wish it could be, it might mean the death of my favorite game of all time....Everquest.



Edited, Dec 13th 2011 6:25pm by hexeez
#3 Dec 15 2011 at 2:08 AM Rating: Good
1 post
hexeez wrote:
I don't think that there is a timetable for the release of EQ Next yet, but it is supposed to be on the drawing boards as a future mmorpg, according to a release from SOE some months ago iirc.

I personally wouldn't ever leave EQ1 for EQ Next unless they allowed EQ vets to move their heavily invested(timewise) characters to the new game (and if there was an exodus from EQ1 to EQ Next). Though, that would be possible only if EQ Next was similar to the original EQ in characters,classes, rulesets etc. Or if it was designed to be EQ1 on a technically modern platform.

The ironic thing is if EQ Next is all of the above I wish it could be, it might mean the death of my favorite game of all time....Everquest.



Edited, Dec 13th 2011 6:25pm by hexeez



__________________

Watch Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows Online Free
#4 Dec 15 2011 at 6:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
820 posts
I wish for it not to thrash the population of EQ1.
#5 Dec 15 2011 at 6:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,992 posts
Pretty much as Hexeez said it.

If they are smart (hmm) they will mirror both EQ1 and EQ2 servers onto the new game and in a meaningful way translate the existing characters into the new game. They would also offer some "pure" servers with no veterans already there (aka finally I can get the name Jonwin...just kidding...)

If the game doesn't do AA, zones, lore, classes etc. in a way that makes sense to EQ1 then EQnext likely fails. EQ2 is more of the WoW style (class trees, etc.) and it's the poor sister --so don't be swayed by much of it.

There is no point trying to be WoWish. Other games have followed and failed. If EQnext is EQ1 without zoning and other clunky things that mmorpg have left behind since 2001, but retains the core EQness... it has a chance to at least be as big as EQ is (and maybe was).
#6 Dec 23 2011 at 3:05 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
6 posts
It's guesstimated around 2013, but SOE hasn't released much info about it. Your best chance is to Google and see what you come up with. That's what I do every few months =P. Don't expect frequent updates, though, for at least the next 6 months. It's just too early for that.
#7 Dec 24 2011 at 10:22 PM Rating: Excellent
*
90 posts
Amaru wrote:
Has anyone heard anything recently regarding EverQuest Next? Also what is everyone's biggest desire/want for this gameItalic Text?


Mercs that heal.

Oh no wait, that is what I want from EQ1.
____________________________
http://eq.magelo.com/profile/1872023
#8 Dec 25 2011 at 3:27 PM Rating: Good
Guru
Avatar
**
477 posts
Reverent wrote:
Mercs that heal.

Oh no wait, that is what I want from EQ1.


LOL,

You could say that again...
#9 Jan 16 2012 at 6:45 AM Rating: Default
2 posts
Hello, i have played EQ ever since then kunark expansion came out. This was the first time i bought the game i remember the iksar on the box next to firiona vie. I am looking forward to everything about EQnext i really am excited no other game has ever got me as excited as i am about EQnext except maybe EQ2 when that was about to be released. Howevere EQ reigns supreme until this day as the No 1 MMO on the market. It is the oldest and the most sucessful. I just hope sony that you do not give in to the chase a dollar do anything for the money attitude that online gaming has turned into since the creation of the abomination WoW. I have along with many others been happy to play and pay for eq for the last 10 years of my life, and the reason is because it is challenging i have fun adventuring, finding places. fearing being alone in the world incase i get jumped by a pack of green cons =p. I am very excited about EQnext i want to spend the next 10-15 years however long it last playing my character in EQnext. Please dont give in to forum trolls crying for easy loot and 30 minute gaming sessions where you can do something worth while. If you only have 30 minutes you should not be logging into a MMO. Please dont make every class able to solo and please do not allow people who do not deserve epic loot be able to get it just because foolish people come on forums and want it. I understand there are people who want an easy life in mmo's and want to be able to solo. But i ask you this. What is the meaning of such trolling? This comes straight out of the darkest corners of Grobb's worst offenders! MMO is to play with others surly the clue is in the abbriviated name people flash about so much. MMO. I dont want to come accross as crass but a lot of the players of you pillar game, EverQuest. Are in my opinion older more mature and more intellegent, we dont want to be handed something on a nerf plate. We want a game we can get stuck into, put our hearts into and get nice reward with nice results and a nice community appriciating someone with a rare item because wow! thats rare! Not because it has an orange outline. Again the intellengence factor comes into play. We dont want to be giving dumbed down quest fed drivel of leveling we want fear to go out into the world thats what brought eq players together the fear of how hard the world was. I fear this post is getting to long for a lot of people to stomach so i will leave it at this. Remember how many peoples ideas you took into account when you made everquest the origional.
0 people. You made the best game ever made . You changed MMO feel you did this by yourselfs by making an amazing game people will play for years to come still thats has outlasted any other MMO and will outlast any other MMO. Eq will outlast eq2 and wow easily. It has done this because the game is hard and you always have something to look forward to achieve. Its not on a plate bonus exp this and bonus exp that. Its hell levels hard grind leveling learning your class well as you level. IF you guys do the right and you dont make EQNEXT based around one big payday when it is released trying to please everyone for 2 short years. You could create the only game ever to surpass EQ1. This is a Godzilla of gaming Sony this is EQNEXT. This is Norrath.
Create her with respect. She is a tough land full of treacherous dangers and forgotton dungeons. She is not a land of easy leveling and easy loot. Again create her with respect. She is after all what has brought you all this way do not throw it back in her face.
Thank you for taking on board my opinions.
Please feel free to contact me if you need.

Skkoris Bloodscale (master of shadows)

Edited, Jan 16th 2012 7:45am by skkoris

Edited, Jan 16th 2012 7:56am by skkoris
#10 Jan 16 2012 at 10:59 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
820 posts
skkoris wrote:
Please dont give in to forum trolls crying for easy loot and 30 minute gaming sessions where you can do something worth while. If you only have 30 minutes you should not be logging into a MMO.



Well, that sounds like a great way to have a game that purposely kills off a potential ton of subscriptions and is doomed to a mediocre existence or fails outright. What's with the rabid viewpoint that it should be extremely time consuming or bust? I'd argue that a well made MMO would offer challenging and/or time intensive content (These are not inclusive of each other, big fat timesinks are just one method for adding "difficulty".)

At the same time, a well made MMO would offer some way of feeling like you've achieved something even in spurts of play as short as 30 minutes. Without that you alienate a large potential audience which is foolish, business and design wise.


I'm not really gonna touch that whole "troll" bit, but if you think the only people who troll message boards are the casual-minded players, clearly you haven't spent time on MMO boards of any sort.



To add to this and address EQ 1 specifically, the exact root of the casual/hardcore, easy/hard strife in this game is that the developers simply do not have the time or resources to cater to everyone. EQ will always flip/flop between too easy and too hard in the eyes of its players at this point, it's unavoidable.



Edited, Jan 16th 2012 11:15pm by Saeel
#11skkoris, Posted: Jan 19 2012 at 7:13 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I dont mind if Games are Casual for players who want 30 minutes here and there. I just dont want EQnext to be. If you want soft core carebear MMO. Uber loot in 30 mins then there are litterally 100 other games to play. Take your pick. EQnext is possibly the ONLY game that will offer hardcore gamers the world which they want and will stay in hence so many still in EQ1. Furthermore who are you to be quoteing "the exact root" of why people complain that EQ is too hard or easy? Yes i think that gamers who want glory in 30 minutes are trolls. 30 mins? come on sometimes im still LFG after 30 mins and you want glory? Like i said there are many many carebear titles for you to go and troll you want dumb downed. I can name 15 off the top of my head. Casual gamers jump games for fun and thats a fact. So why cater mainly to the guys who will play till the next big game comes out? Be more sense to cater to those who love Norrath and will stay. So please please please dont come here saying you want EQnext casual 30 minute game and say its going to be foolish business and design wise if its not because who are you to say that??
#12 Jan 19 2012 at 6:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,992 posts
skkoris wrote:
----snip---
A troll thats who, go play warcraft




Really?

I login to a fresh server, let's say its TLP (for the nice painful slow xp curve that is worse than 1999 for levels 1-5). Even if I pick a horrible combination... let's say erudite cleric of paineel (So I am guaranteed an empty newb zone and bad dps against mobs my level even at level 1).

In the first half hour I will have gained some xp (not much on TLP... probably a level on a regular server). I've proably earned enough copper to buy a few of my level 1 and 2 spells. Maybe I have scored a better weapon or some cloth armor off the skellies.

Maybe I decided to take up tradeskills (after a few half hours of getting myself up to level 5-9ish) so I could farm spiders in Tox. and after a few months I will ding 20 and earn my name...

That was hardcore fun times in 99, and productive use of playtime, but you also had people in nearly every zone to do it with, or at least chatter with. Even on TLP not so many are playing that way. We just know the game too well, and know that putting hours into a full set of cloth armor is... not hardcore... it's a waste of time keeping you from the grouping population.

Vanguard tried to be more hardcore (if one read the official boards in the year+ leading up to the open beta) and that didn't work out. What's left of that games launch population is enjoying a significantly eased-up version of the vision.

My point is... you have to learn the lessons. EQNext won't maintain a viable playerbase if it isn't at least as cool and fun as EQ to both the hardcore and casual alike. Hardcore players are loved by the devs because they are the content challenge to appease... the accountants like the casuals since they pay more $ for less use of company resources. Casuals need to make progress on a casual play schedule. No casuals... (because you made the hardcorest of them all game) ...no game.
#13 Jan 20 2012 at 9:38 AM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,280 posts
I hope EQNext is at least as likely as Starcraft 2. That game was considered "legendary" in terms of its eventual appearance and sure enough "eventually" Blizzard came out with it.

Amazingly, the first release only had campaign games for 1 of the 3 races. Meaning it wasn't really complete. Let's pray EQNext doesn't come up initially with only 1/3 of the races and classes. LOL I think I'd rather wait even longer and get a complete game.

____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#14 Jan 20 2012 at 4:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,992 posts
Sippin wrote:
I hope EQNext is at least as likely as Starcraft 2. That game was considered "legendary" in terms of its eventual appearance and sure enough "eventually" Blizzard came out with it.

Amazingly, the first release only had campaign games for 1 of the 3 races. Meaning it wasn't really complete. Let's pray EQNext doesn't come up initially with only 1/3 of the races and classes. LOL I think I'd rather wait even longer and get a complete game.



Warhammer Online did the same trick. The Dwarve/orc continent was way more detailed, complicated in design and fleshed out design-wise level 1-30 then the entire rest of the game put together.

You started as one of those races and were pvp-in-each others faces all the way levelling up and immersed in the content with a huge variety of questing events.

The other continents/race pairings you hardly saw the enemy players (without really hunting) and did extremely copy-pasted quest arcs for each 5 levels. It was like playing totally different games. Considering the servers I played on those were not popular races.... it's no wonder the population crashed since people weren't seeing the best content.

A botched launch will kill EQnext before the free subs even run out. True for any game now I would say --the market isn't forgiving.
#15 Jan 22 2012 at 10:55 AM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
snailish wrote:
[quote=Sippin]A botched launch will kill EQnext before the free subs even run out. True for any game now I would say --the market isn't forgiving.


A botched launch is impossible to recover from. Look at Vanguard. The game needed probably another year in development, and the work they did was not focussed properly (instead of building the areas one at a time, finishing one and going to the next, they tried to build a bunch of them at the same time, and the result was multiple poorly done, broken zones, instead of a couple that were done well.) That game, which had tremendous potential and sold something like 250K units at the launch, never recovered.)

EQ:N will almost certainly be F2P though, so the subs running out won't be so much an issue.
#16 Jan 23 2012 at 2:53 PM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,280 posts
That quote is from snailish, not moi! ;)
____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#17 Feb 03 2012 at 10:10 PM Rating: Good
15 posts
I agree with earlier posters, If they want to make it a success then they need to implement as many aspects as they can from EQ. Just as said before, they need to make the game close enough in likeness to EQ Live to be able to carry over characters from the original. I don't even know if it's feasible to do that but think that if they don't then we'll just have another EQ2 on our hands. Not everyone that has invested countless hours leveling characters over the years while learning a game as vast as EQ is willing to start over. I for one won't, and know for a fact that my time spent on the game is pale in comparison to most.
#18 Jun 05 2012 at 9:38 PM Rating: Decent
1 post
I played EQ from 1999, when only two planes could be raided!. The leveling took months to get to level 20, let alone 50! The whole game was a time sink. I stayed for 6 years and also played EQ2. Both games were totally different.

My hope that EQ next will be similar to old school EQ, but with faster recovery times like WoW used (mediating with food etc) The thought of wasting my life again to be hardcore is over though, as with most from that time we have moved on. There are plenty of games out now, what made EQ so special was its uniqueness, it was the only MMORPG and was well priced so many could play. Your PC didn't have to be the lastest to play either. In today's world these games are a dime a dozen, so it will have to be brilliant to survive. It will need to cater to both casual and hardcore as others above have stated. But it needs to be well managed and who knows if SOE can do that, they have killed many games so far........
Necro Warning: This post occurred more than thirty days after the prior, and may be a necropost.
#19 Jun 06 2012 at 4:38 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
1,280 posts
The more I think on it, EQNext should be made to be a REAL challenge.

1. Nobody can talk to anybody outside their race until they level up other language skills and make that take serious time and effort.
2. All NPCs are KOS except those in your home town. And even those won't talk with you until you complete some involved quests.
3. Forget being invisible... EVERY NPC is SI.
4. No con colors... you just gotta take your best shot.
5. PvP on for all, of course, and no level limits.
6. XP is REAL slow... it takes like at least 16hours of steady gameplay to gain one level. And starting at level one.
7. Death causes loss of an entire level. No rez spells in game, not at least until like level 120.
8. Corpses rot in one hour. In OR out of game. Of course, all your gear rots with your corpse. Plus everything in your bank. (The "lore" is that the mob who killed you got your bank account keys off your corpse, ran to the nearest bank and grabbed all your banked stuff. Reasonable, right?)
9. The game will have raids, of course. But if you die in a raid, corpse rot is instant and you're insta-respawned back to level 1 and have to start over again. This ensures players take raiding SERIOUSLY. The heart's desire of every real guild leader!
10. The game should have EPIC quests, naturally. But for EVERY piece of decent armor. This makes it challenging---REALLY challenging---to fill every slot.
11. EQ has two slots for fingers, ears and wrists, right?? Have two slots for feet and hands, also. Plus TEN slots for fingers. What the hell, most of us have TEN fingers, not TWO, right??
12. Hackers will be "shot" on sight, of course. The game will have GMs stationed in every zone permanently and they have REAL god-like powers, including the abilities to see your screen remotely at will. Not only is the hacker perma-banned but everyone he's grouped with in the last 24 hours plus every member of his guild. That will force players to be very very careful with whom they group or guild. Right?
13. Random GM events, where GMs "dress up" as a level 150 villain with instant harm-touch and randomly visit a zone, even raid zones, and start remotely death-touching players. Everyone loves The Sleeper, right? Same deal but not just once per server! This kind of death doesn't de-level you, of course. You just lose one piece of armor.
14. Gear rots, of course, unless you repair it constantly. Expect to be wire-brushing that rust off your breastplate and hammering the dents out of your longsword between every other kill.
15. Money can "fall" out of your pocket, randomly, unless you buy certain "AAs" like Hole-Free Pants Pockets. Plus unless you buy the AA "EQFDIC Insurance" you face the risk of losing your bank stash in the event of embezzlement by the bank NPC.
16. What's up with carrying EIGHT backpacks? How realistic is that? In MYEQNEXT you get ONE! You can carry a second one but it encumbers you and cuts your AC, HP Regen and Mana Regen in half.

This is just for starters! ;)



Edited, Jun 6th 2012 6:42am by Sippin

Edited, Jun 6th 2012 6:53am by Sippin
____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#20 Jun 06 2012 at 5:24 AM Rating: Decent
****
9,258 posts
Sippin wrote:
The more I think on it, EQNext should be made to be a REAL challenge.

1. Nobody can talk to anybody outside their race until they level up other language skills and make that take serious time and effort.
2. All NPCs are KOS except those in your home town. And even those won't talk with you until you complete some involved quests.
3. Forget being invisible... EVERY NPC is SI.
4. No con colors... you just gotta take your best shot.
5. PvP on for all, of course, and no level limits.
6. XP is REAL slow... it takes like at least 16hours of steady gameplay to gain one level. And starting at level one.
7. Death causes loss of an entire level. No rez spells in game, not at least until like level 120.
8. Corpses rot in one hour. In OR out of game. Of course, all your gear rots with your corpse. Plus everything in your bank. (The "lore" is that the mob who killed you got your bank account keys off your corpse, ran to the nearest bank and grabbed all your banked stuff. Reasonable, right?)
9. The game will have raids, of course. But if you die in a raid, corpse rot is instant and you're insta-respawned back to level 1 and have to start over again. This ensures players take raiding SERIOUSLY. The heart's desire of every real guild leader!
10. The game should have EPIC quests, naturally. But for EVERY piece of decent armor. This makes it challenging---REALLY challenging---to fill every slot.
11. EQ has two slots for fingers, ears and wrists, right?? Have two slots for feet and hands, also. Plus TEN slots for fingers. What the hell, most of us have TEN fingers, not TWO, right??
12. Hackers will be "shot" on sight, of course. The game will have GMs stationed in every zone permanently and they have REAL god-like powers, including the abilities to see your screen remotely at will. Not only is the hacker perma-banned but everyone he's grouped with in the last 24 hours plus every member of his guild. That will force players to be very very careful with whom they group or guild. Right?
13. Random GM events, where GMs "dress up" as a level 150 villain with instant harm-touch and randomly visit a zone, even raid zones, and start remotely death-touching players. Everyone loves The Sleeper, right? Same deal but not just once per server! This kind of death doesn't de-level you, of course. You just lose one piece of armor.
14. Gear rots, of course, unless you repair it constantly. Expect to be wire-brushing that rust off your breastplate and hammering the dents out of your longsword between every other kill.
15. Money can "fall" out of your pocket, randomly, unless you buy certain "AAs" like Hole-Free Pants Pockets. Plus unless you buy the AA "EQFDIC Insurance" you face the risk of losing your bank stash in the event of embezzlement by the bank NPC.
16. What's up with carrying EIGHT backpacks? How realistic is that? In MYEQNEXT you get ONE! You can carry a second one but it encumbers you and cuts your AC, HP Regen and Mana Regen in half.

This is just for starters! ;)



Edited, Jun 6th 2012 6:42am by Sippin

Edited, Jun 6th 2012 6:53am by Sippin



Good god... Smiley: lol
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#21 Jun 06 2012 at 10:04 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,313 posts
Actually the idea of having to lvl another language up to talk to another race isn't a bad idea. Would prob have to be one of those things that later expansions would remove the need for. Everquest 2 had the right idea on leveling a language skill up, alot more fun than spamming text to your group.
____________________________
Hi
#22 Jun 06 2012 at 12:16 PM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
fronglo wrote:
Everquest 2 had the right idea on leveling a language skill up, alot more fun than spamming text to your group.


I agree.
#23 Jun 07 2012 at 5:20 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
1,280 posts
I seem to remember vaguely that levelling a language skill used to be tough. IIRC you could not raise your skill beyond the level of the person "training" you. So if you're grouped with someone who say is 50 in Human, the most he could raise you is to 50 by chatting with you in group.

Plus there was something about having to zone after so many skillups in order to continue raising the skill, which was also a drag on levelling.

Anyone remember exactly how that worked? I go back to 1999 in EQ and I do remember it was such a pain that I had no interest in language. But I had a friend in-game who was OC about maxing out all his languages and he spent ridiculous hours working them all up and tracking down other players masochistic enough to group with him spamming and zoning over n over...
____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#24 Jun 07 2012 at 6:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
It was something like 3 skill-ups per time you zoned and you could train someone to something like +2 your skill. So if you wanted to grind out a language, you and a buddy would sit on the zoneline and spam one another until you both got two or three points, then zone, then spam for two or three points, then zone, then spam for...
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#25 Jun 07 2012 at 8:01 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
1,280 posts
Jophiel wrote:
It was something like 3 skill-ups per time you zoned and you could train someone to something like +2 your skill. So if you wanted to grind out a language, you and a buddy would sit on the zoneline and spam one another until you both got two or three points, then zone, then spam for two or three points, then zone, then spam for...


Wow, hard to imagine any players tolerating that kind of grind today.
____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#26 Jun 08 2012 at 6:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
To add insult to it, this was during the days of dial-up connections and 64 megs of memory. Zoning could take 2-3 minutes for some.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#27 Jun 09 2012 at 9:22 PM Rating: Decent
15 posts
By the time Sony gets EQNext out there cust service dececions will have effectively killed any launch they could ever hope for.
#28 Jun 15 2012 at 1:59 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
28 posts
Sippin wrote:
The more I think on it, EQNext should be made to be a REAL challenge.

1. Nobody can talk to anybody outside their race until they level up other language skills and make that take serious time and effort.
2. All NPCs are KOS except those in your home town. And even those won't talk with you until you complete some involved quests.
3. Forget being invisible... EVERY NPC is SI.
4. No con colors... you just gotta take your best shot.
5. PvP on for all, of course, and no level limits.
6. XP is REAL slow... it takes like at least 16hours of steady gameplay to gain one level. And starting at level one.
7. Death causes loss of an entire level. No rez spells in game, not at least until like level 120.
8. Corpses rot in one hour. In OR out of game. Of course, all your gear rots with your corpse. Plus everything in your bank. (The "lore" is that the mob who killed you got your bank account keys off your corpse, ran to the nearest bank and grabbed all your banked stuff. Reasonable, right?)
9. The game will have raids, of course. But if you die in a raid, corpse rot is instant and you're insta-respawned back to level 1 and have to start over again. This ensures players take raiding SERIOUSLY. The heart's desire of every real guild leader!
10. The game should have EPIC quests, naturally. But for EVERY piece of decent armor. This makes it challenging---REALLY challenging---to fill every slot.
11. EQ has two slots for fingers, ears and wrists, right?? Have two slots for feet and hands, also. Plus TEN slots for fingers. What the hell, most of us have TEN fingers, not TWO, right??
12. Hackers will be "shot" on sight, of course. The game will have GMs stationed in every zone permanently and they have REAL god-like powers, including the abilities to see your screen remotely at will. Not only is the hacker perma-banned but everyone he's grouped with in the last 24 hours plus every member of his guild. That will force players to be very very careful with whom they group or guild. Right?
13. Random GM events, where GMs "dress up" as a level 150 villain with instant harm-touch and randomly visit a zone, even raid zones, and start remotely death-touching players. Everyone loves The Sleeper, right? Same deal but not just once per server! This kind of death doesn't de-level you, of course. You just lose one piece of armor.
14. Gear rots, of course, unless you repair it constantly. Expect to be wire-brushing that rust off your breastplate and hammering the dents out of your longsword between every other kill.
15. Money can "fall" out of your pocket, randomly, unless you buy certain "AAs" like Hole-Free Pants Pockets. Plus unless you buy the AA "EQFDIC Insurance" you face the risk of losing your bank stash in the event of embezzlement by the bank NPC.
16. What's up with carrying EIGHT backpacks? How realistic is that? In MYEQNEXT you get ONE! You can carry a second one but it encumbers you and cuts your AC, HP Regen and Mana Regen in half.

This is just for starters! ;)


1 - fair enough. makes sense, really.
2 - part one, yes, part 2 , why? if you go to the local 7/11 do you have to do tasks to buy a big gulp and a frozen buritto? that's just silly.
3 - no.
4 - what? are you a masochist?
5 - nope nope nope. i seriously hate PvP. i've never played a game where i enjoyed PvP. there are enough things in norrath that want to kill me, why would i want to have to worrying about some 15 year old with no life and a rich daddy who can play 24/7 running around trying to gank me just cause it makes him feel like his teeny epeen is significant?
6 - got no problem with this. sometimes i think EQ suffers for allowing lower level toons to level to rapidly - you can PL to 85 in just a matter of hours. this is fine if you already know how to play your character, and are just rebuilding say, another shaman on another account, to use to buff the alts on your main account... but otherwise, it can make for a horrible player.
7 - meh.. i don't like that, but i don't hate it... i'd say 10% of the level.. a whole level is kinda harsh. say you're lvl 50, 90% of the way in, look out TRAINED, bang, you're now lvl 49, because someone is a jerk. not exactly fair. now, if ALL zones were instanced, like guild wars then i'd go along with your whole level loss. there can be no trains unless YOU cause them, so you'd deserve what you get.
8 - just, no. why? thunderstorm. power loss... die because LD... power is out 3 hours. all your stuff is gone because a lightening bolt hit a transformer a mile from your house. not a good idea. people would abandon the game like lemmings.
9 - this is just stupid. good idea to make sure no one raids.
10 - i like this one, actually. instead of just 1 epic weapon, every slot slot has an 'epic' option. i've thought they should add an epic BP quest for years.
11 - yup. agree totally - and will add that you will have to make sure you check every one of the 10 rings for type and style, because some combinations of the wrong things can cause the rings to cancel each other out, or even combine and cancel out the bonuses from another piece of armor.
12 - part one, yes.part 2, yes to the GM and his godly powers. the rest of it is just lame. you've just killed pick-up groups. no one will ever go LFG because they'll be terrified of ending up grouped with a hacker. guilds would exist of only people who know each other IRL, because one little misjudgment could get 60 people banned. kind of a dumb idea, in my opinion.
13 i decided at this point that you were just being silly. at first i thought this was a serious post, but this was the proverbial straw from the proverbial camel that made me realize you were just being goofy and amusing yourself.
14 so, on THIS one i decided i should pile in with you have have a little fun as well . Not only should gear rot unless you repair it, it can also poison you if you go to long between repairs. enough combat, your BP will get all banged up, right? with jagged edges, and those will cut you and give you lead poisoning or gangrene and the like. ignored long enough, it can slowly cause your death, and such a death will carry an extra level loss as a penalty for being lazy.
15 - not only can money fall out or the bank get embezzled, until you finish the epic raid events " The Brothers of Leemen must DIE!" and " Lynch Merrel!" your whole bank could disappear and take all of your ( and everyone who uses that bank's ) stuff, AND cause you to lose 50% of the stuff you loot ( chosen randomly) to disappear from your inventory for up to the next 90 days.
16 - with the reduction to one 12 slot back pack, you do get 2 4 slot pants pockets, 1 2 slot shirt pocket, and 2 2 and 2 4slot jacket pockets. you must remember to remove your jacket before a fight, or the effect of the jacket cut the stats of your BP by 50%. if you were carrying 2 backpacks ( at a 50% reduction by itself) it would mean that the jacket and the 2 packs would reduce your combat stats and regen by 100%. so take the jacket off before you get into a fight.


I really hope you were being silly.... because if you were serious about most of the 16 items above, you are describing the perfect game for me to avoid like the black death.
____________________________
- Zanaabi Rumslayer
- 95 Kitty Shammy of The Nameless... I mean Druzzil Ro.. I mean Xegony!
- Member of <Champions of Norrath>

" Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?"
#29 Jun 16 2012 at 5:46 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
1,280 posts
LOLOLO

I woulda thought you'd get the joke earlier than that! Hehe.

But thanks for your additions, they made me laugh out loud and at 6am in the morning, I don't laugh all that much!

Seriously, though, you'd really play a game where GMs could see your screen at will? That's a serious privacy violation, not even sure it would be LEGAL.

Edited, Jun 16th 2012 7:47am by Sippin
____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#30 Jun 17 2012 at 5:55 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,069 posts
EQ Next will most likely be casual in that you can play on an Ipad or in Unity. That's just the state of the genre. The new Star Wars game proved that the end is nigh for what we are used to thus far in MMO's.
____________________________
After 14 years, I'm not listing every friggin character.
#31 Jun 17 2012 at 2:13 PM Rating: Good
Reyla wrote:
EQ Next will most likely be casual in that you can play on an Ipad or in Unity. That's just the state of the genre. The new Star Wars game proved that the end is nigh for what we are used to thus far in MMO's.


Yes, the new Star Wars game that did numbers SOE can't even DREAM of approaching EVER (for various internal reasons). I don't think triple-A MMOs are going to regress to the point where they can be played on hardware as limited as tablets though. Just like I didn't think console MMOs were "the way of the future" years ago when people jumped on that bandwagon. How's that turned out?

I do think that skkoris is going to be sorely disappointed though. It's empirical fact that "hardcore gamers" are poor or otherwise not worth concentrating on. The proof of this is in how many "hardcore" games fail (either completely or just fail to live up to expectations) while the 'casual' games do ridiculous numbers. Hardcore games only do well in Asia (Lineage being the most obvious example) while in the West, they flounder (ask Aventurine). That's the reason everyone's rushing to dumb down their games, it's the "accessibility" hook. To the majority of developers and publishers "accessible" = "easy". Easy to play, easy to advance, easy to understand. As much as people might not like it, the only game that's really championed the "hardcore" ethos, is EVE. No matter how much they try to make things easier to understand, it's still calculus compared to the simple arithmetic that has become the genre standard.

EQNext is going to be maximum accessibility, minimal fuss...and will fail (to reach or exceed expectations) as a result. It probably won't appeal to a large enough percentage of the players of EITHER existing EQ. SOE seems to get their reasoning from reading tea leaves or something. They'd also do well to use their best and brightest on the project (poached from other companies), not their worst and dimmest (hi Absor. Mr "I didn't realize...". From shrouds to monster missions to Old Man MacKenzie. "I didn't realize people would grind out faceroll difficulty content for rewards far outstripping anything else in the game" Smiley: rolleyes). Heck, since 38 went belly up, Rashere is probably available.
#32 Jun 18 2012 at 5:34 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
1,280 posts
Maybe EQNext could have servers set at various levels of difficulty, like Easy, Medium, Hard and Brutal. They could even have a Cheater's Server where hacking is tolerated! That would reduce hacking on the "straight" servers... maybe. I wonder if the allure of cheating is the "illegality" of it? In any case, this design approach is used by a lot of solo games so no reason it couldn't be applied to a MMO.

Edited, Jun 18th 2012 7:34am by Sippin
____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#33 Jun 18 2012 at 12:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sippin wrote:
Seriously, though, you'd really play a game where GMs could see your screen at will? That's a serious privacy violation, not even sure it would be LEGAL.

GMs should be able to activate your webcam at will to make sure someone else isn't playing your account.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#34 Jun 18 2012 at 5:07 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,992 posts
EQ-style graphics exist reasonably well in a modern form: warhammer. They even made certain races have too few armor looks and some newb armors more interesting than the next 35 levels worth... so with a bit more thought and development it could be done fully right.

Import EQ's lore and familiar zones into what warhammer is... (without pretending to do PVP) and you'd have a smooth running game. Warhammer's tome of knowledge (quest log/personal lore) was really well done. The public quest mechanism was interesting. Give that game EQ's content and it would be something worth playing... ...and yes Warhammer borrowed heavily from WoW, but mostly good things (if you ignore the pvp stuff).

Talent trees and cut-and-paste quest arcs to level aren't something to do in EQnext though. Non linear journey is good, and EQ has always been able to have a high-end end-game.

That some of my hopes.

Note that I am not against pvp. Just not for EQ since they've never really done it right.
#35 Jun 20 2012 at 10:45 AM Rating: Excellent
snailish wrote:
Non linear journey is good


Non linear in MMO terms usually equates to sandbox. Sandboxes aren't 'accessible'. 'People' need direction. They need to be told what to do from level 0 to cap, every single step of the way. This isn't conjecture by the way. Look at every mainstream game released or revamped since 2005. What's their most common design feature? Part of what made Age of Conan fail was the stark contrast between the Tortage experience (heavily directed) and post-Tortage (find your own way!).

Original EQ was very nearly a sandbox. Sure, the quests were there, but most of 'em weren't worth doing.

snailish wrote:
Note that I am not against pvp. Just not for EQ since they've never really done it right.


The problem with PvP in MMOs is the old scripture: A man cannot serve two masters. If everyone on the team isn't on board designing the game around PvP, then it's a side concern and side concerns are never given as much attention as core features when an MMO is being developed. If the game is designed around PvP, it'll be anathema to the larger pool of players who seem to equate 'pvp' with 'gankfest'. So the safest path is to focus the game on PvE with a small, optional, easily ignored PvP component tacked on. It's kinda like my earlier statement on hardcore gamers being poor or otherwise not worth concentrating on. If hardcore gamers supported hardcore games like casual players support (the hundred or so) casual games, you'd see a lot more hardcore games being made. These publishers (and some developers) are sheep. They follow, but only where the money is. Risk is BAD, which is why few games try anything truly new or different. EQNext will not be the game that breaks from that trend. SOE is ridiculously risk-averse. That's part of the reason they canceled The Agency (there was no precedent to follow and it would cost a lot to get it to a release state (even by SOE's low standards) so you kill it and charge it off the next quarter's report).
#36 Jun 20 2012 at 5:11 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,992 posts
Points taken Remianen.

I suppose I actually like a "sandbox with many tunnels". LDoN in it's heyday was a nice tight example of this: you all wanted something from the vendors... the more casual you had played up the that point the more of the vendor stuff you could use (in theory), but those that played intensely finished things off faster and actually maxed out the gear options.

Kunark and Velious both did interesting things with this as you could retrace the journey and alter factions to gain more content/rewards if you wanted. PoP was pure linear once you knew what to do, though I concede some of the alternate flags weaken that argument. I personally hated PoP for years but have gained more appreciation for it in recent times. So I guess what I really want is lots of variety/options.

But not phasing... for those not aware that is content so linear you are in the same zone as someone and can't see/interact with them because they aren't on the same quest arc stage as you. WoW did a bunch of it with Cataclysm and it made grouping a hassle outside of premades.

----

PvP you said what I meant better than I had said it.

----

I suppose what I really want is EQNext to make me want to play it longer than the 2 months every other game has held me outside of EQ. EQ I keep coming back to.
#37 Jun 21 2012 at 6:29 AM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,280 posts
"Non-linear" journey IS good. The extreme linearness of a game like Age of Conan turned me completely off.

One big part of the magical attraction of EQ is the sheer breadth and depth of the game, something inescapably tied to its age and huge number of expansions. Anyone can get hours of enjoyment just running around exploring. The incredible amount of content and lore... how many other games of this sort have quests which have been unsolved for YEARS? Of course, one might argue some of them are broken quests and hence will never be solved LOL. Despite playing for 12 years I still find quests, items, NPCs and other content which are entirely new to me. The replayability is massive, especially if you make alts. I've been going back and making alts and then doing the epic quests for those alts just to appreciate the old content once again, a lot of which I've never seen because epic quests are so class-specific.

This is one reason I strongly dislike how they handle hot zones. I LIKE the idea of giving players extra XP to encourage them to group with other real players. I just don't like how the way they implement it forces everyone into a strict LINEAR series of zones. Despite the game having hundreds upon hundreds of zones for every level range, players are "stuck" playing in the same 10 or so zones, IF they want to enjoy the extra XP. And since most people want to maximize their XP, this means if you actually want to group with other real people, you have little choice but to spend most of your gametime in this same tiny subset of game zones.

Not sure I can offer a solution here other than suggesting that XP bonuses should be tied to the group rather than to the zone. I mean beyond the bonus currently given for a full group, which doesn't really work to reward everyone with extra XP---it works to make it so as you add players to an existing group, none of the previous members will LOSE XP to the new group members. That's a good design but a better one would be to allow players to port their own "hot zone bonus" to whatever zone they want. This would allow players to explore ANY zone and still enjoy the bonus.

Another solution would be to change hot zones much more often. But I could see practical issues here, not the least of which being we all hate patch downtimes and this practice would generate them regularly.

PVP is a non-issue in my mind for a game like EQ. I'm sure the developers realize the demand for PVP in such games is very small and they're not going to waste precious resources developing and improving PVP. The proof lies in the scarcity of PVP content in EQ, confined to a small and dwindling population on one server. The emu version of EQ, "of which we shall not speak", has one reasonably popular blue server and one completely dying red (PVP) server because ultimately PVP just isn't all that marketable. Yeah, there's a chicken-and-the-egg issue here: IF they did PVP "right" ("right" involving some nebulous idea of proper "balancing") would PVP be insanely popular. My educated guess would be NO.



Edited, Jun 21st 2012 8:34am by Sippin
____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#38 Jun 21 2012 at 5:19 PM Rating: Good
snailish wrote:
I suppose I actually like a "sandbox with many tunnels". LDoN in it's heyday was a nice tight example of this: you all wanted something from the vendors... the more casual you had played up the that point the more of the vendor stuff you could use (in theory), but those that played intensely finished things off faster and actually maxed out the gear options.


I agree. I remember having to grind out ridiculous amounts of North Ro "adventures" because I was a rogue (big DPS) and most of my friends were clerics (so the 1492 pt armor was their goal). God I hate NRo missions now.

snailish wrote:
I suppose what I really want is EQNext to make me want to play it longer than the 2 months every other game has held me outside of EQ. EQ I keep coming back to.


Honestly, I think we're doomed in that respect. I played TERA from headstart until about 2 weeks post-release. I loved that game. The combat system, and even the graphics. I read all the whines about their female models and thought, "Are these people NEW?" Go look at Lineage II's dark elf females. Hell, look at WoW's Night Elf female. Stay at the character select screen for a couple minutes and watch the character hop up and down for no reason other than to make her boobs....well, you know. Why do people never complain about unrealistically designed male models (again, WoW's Night Elf male is an example)? Anyway, I quit playing TERA at the end of those two weeks but forgot to cancel my account. As a result, I got dinged for a YEAR'S sub to the game. Guess I'll be playing Tera after all, eh? Smiley: tongue

Sippin wrote:
"Non-linear" journey IS good. The extreme linearness of a game like Age of Conan turned me completely off.


WHAT? U r weird! Age of Conan needed MORE linearity. They needed an NPC that would tell you exactly where each quest could be found and whether it was worth doing!

That was sarcasm, by the way.

I personally prefer sandboxes. The problem is, there are so few (EVE and Ryzom come to mind) that unless they have large budgets (which EVE does but Ryzom does not), can give uneven results. I don't need a game developer telling me what my goals are.

Sippin wrote:
how many other games of this sort have quests which have been unsolved for YEARS? Of course, one might argue some of them are broken quests and hence will never be solved LOL.


I was gonna say. Go look at the Test patch notes for next Wednesday's "June patch". Here's an example:

- Bristlebane has been shuffling his Deck of Spontaneous Generation and has thrown in a few new tricks. (Five previously unobtainable items that resulted from combinations of mischief cards can now be created.)
- A previously unobtainable item that Einhorst McMannus has been after for many years can now be found.

How many years has it been since Bristlebane cards dropped? Didn't they stop dropping after the first PoM revamp (what, 11 years ago?)? And it took this long to put lion meat in the drop table?

Sippin wrote:
This is one reason I strongly dislike how they handle hot zones. I LIKE the idea of giving players extra XP to encourage them to group with other real players. I just don't like how the way they implement it forces everyone into a strict LINEAR series of zones. Despite the game having hundreds upon hundreds of zones for every level range, players are "stuck" playing in the same 10 or so zones, IF they want to enjoy the extra XP. And since most people want to maximize their XP, this means if you actually want to group with other real people, you have little choice but to spend most of your gametime in this same tiny subset of game zones.


The main problem with hotzones in my view is, because the devs don't play their own game, they don't know which zones suck and why. All they see is design intent, not actual datamined player feedback. The dev teams of some later games (City of Heroes comes to mind) use actual player behavior to direct their design decisions. Not what players SAY, what they DO (which is often completely contrary to one another). Datamining would've told Elidroth that Plane of Disease has always been a hated zone and that Dranik's Scar's only real activity has usually been related to grabbing Hollows missions. Otherwise, it's a transit zone. He always puts headscratching zones in every hotzone set (that's what convinces me he doesn't play the game).

Sippin wrote:
Not sure I can offer a solution here other than suggesting that XP bonuses should be tied to the group rather than to the zone. I mean beyond the bonus currently given for a full group, which doesn't really work to reward everyone with extra XP---it works to make it so as you add players to an existing group, none of the previous members will LOSE XP to the new group members. That's a good design but a better one would be to allow players to port their own "hot zone bonus" to whatever zone they want. This would allow players to explore ANY zone and still enjoy the bonus.


The way it was explained to me by a former lead designer is, EQ's system is antiquated and there are only so many workarounds they can do before it starts to resemble the proverbial house of cards. Also, an xp bonus tied to a group would benefit some people (like you and me) far more than others. Nobody wants to get it to the point like in was in Earth & Beyond (full group = 500% more xp) but that was several problems compounded (the biggest being, there was no group range. So 5 soloers would group up for the bonus and then go to the four corners and center of the zone and solo). And your portable bonus idea flies in the face of the whole purpose of hotzones. They're designed to get people to congregate in a smaller subset of zones, in order to possibly facilitate grouping. That has failed but the purpose can still be served. You just have to give people a reason to group up actively. Offering better loot drops while grouped as well as a real xp bonus would help there.

Sippin wrote:
Another solution would be to change hot zones much more often. But I could see practical issues here, not the least of which being we all hate patch downtimes and this practice would generate them regularly.


No it wouldn't. They could change them monthly since there is already a monthly patch scheduled. Problem is, hotzones need an item and designing the item (usually an aug) is time consuming, apparently. Not like most of the augs are actually any good though.

Sippin wrote:
PVP is a non-issue in my mind for a game like EQ. I'm sure the developers realize the demand for PVP in such games is very small and they're not going to waste precious resources developing and improving PVP. The proof lies in the scarcity of PVP content in EQ, confined to a small and dwindling population on one server. The emu version of EQ, "of which we shall not speak", has one reasonably popular blue server and one completely dying red (PVP) server because ultimately PVP just isn't all that marketable. Yeah, there's a chicken-and-the-egg issue here: IF they did PVP "right" ("right" involving some nebulous idea of proper "balancing") would PVP be insanely popular. My educated guess would be NO.


For EQ, sure. That horse left the barn years ago (and is probably dead on another continent by now). I think PvP can work (EVE is proof of that) but it's really not worth devoting significant resources to. Even if you do it "right" (by whatever means you choose to define it), it's not going to attract a critical mass of players because the vast majority of the market is not willing to subject themselves to the typical behavior in PvP. This is a case where the few spoil it for the many. No one wants to be teabagged after losing a fight, especially if the fight was against someone significantly higher level/gear/skill. In addition, if your game is not hacker proof (or at least hacker resistant), there's another factor to consider (and budget for). So a game that's expected to have a relatively low number of players (and thus, lower revenue) having to spend more money on CS (GMs) and tech (coders to close holes) to combat "cheating" just doesn't look attractive to anyone looking to finance a game. Aventurine almost went belly up after Darkfall (a very well made FFA PvP game) failed to meet expectations.
#39 Jun 22 2012 at 3:48 PM Rating: Good
"Ramianen"
I would agree with most of what you have to say, right up until the points about PvP. I am not a huge PvP fan but I have to admit it has its place in any "good" moderm MMO. The think the confusion people have about PvP'esk features is that it doesnt have to be a huge draw to players that would not normally play the game, it doesnt have to be fair, and it doesnt have to be prefect. In my oppinion PvP is more about something else to do with your time, while in game, when you need a break from other content. Will people forever complain about it? Abosolutely, just as they will complain about character models, and raid content, that is the nature of the beast, and is a bi-product of to many nerds with wayyyy to much time on their hands.

PvP should be in any MMO that is to be taken seriously, a Dev's goal with a MMO should be longivity and long time subscriptions, anything you can add that causes a player to stay in game when getting bored is a good addition to the game. It doesnt have to be perfect to work, but it does need attention. Heck the early days of Battle Ground in WoW were huge for players that needed a break from other content. Even in EQ1 where the only options we had to Dueling, and the rare areana fights, were very fun.

I would love to see EQNext incorporate some type of BG system, or even specific zone areas that were open PvP. This does not need to be a major part of the game, and should be completely avoidable by those that want nothing to do with it. But the option of PvP should be there. Again we are not attempting to bring in hardcore PvPers into an EQ sequal, but we do want those that are a little A.D.D in nature to have an outlet for their boredom, this is more about keeping players than it is about bringing in new players.

Edited, Jun 22nd 2012 5:49pm by RiplyAnklebiter
#40 Jun 22 2012 at 4:00 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
1,280 posts
I agree there's no real downside to including PVP in an MMO altho if it's obviously unbalanced the weaker classes will complain royally. But that's part of the game, as frustrating as it might be. And all the more rewarding if a so-called underpowered player manages to beat a supposedly overpowered player!

I also think BG would be a great idea in EQNext, especially if it allowed players from different servers to interact. (This might pose problems if they include FV-type servers, but cross that bridge when we come to it!)
____________________________
Sippin 100 DRU *** Max AA *** Firionia Vie
Master Artisan (300) * Baker * Brewer * Fletcher * Jeweler * Potter * Researcher * Smith * Tailor
My crew: 100 WAR ENC CLE MAG WIZ SHD BER RNG SHM Master Alchemist 96 PAL *** 70 ROG Master Tinkerer & Poison-Maker
#41 Jun 23 2012 at 8:57 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Remianen wrote:
I was gonna say. Go look at the Test patch notes for next Wednesday's "June patch". Here's an example:

- Bristlebane has been shuffling his Deck of Spontaneous Generation and has thrown in a few new tricks. (Five previously unobtainable items that resulted from combinations of mischief cards can now be created.)
- A previously unobtainable item that Einhorst McMannus has been after for many years can now be found.

How many years has it been since Bristlebane cards dropped? Didn't they stop dropping after the first PoM revamp (what, 11 years ago?)? And it took this long to put lion meat in the drop table?

I'm reminded of the seven-odd years the Shakey The Scarecrow quest was broken until they finally trashed the entire thing and made it part of an epic quest, their rationale being that no one in the dev offices even knew what the quest was supposed to be/reward any more Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#42 Jun 25 2012 at 4:48 PM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
Remianen wrote:
Reyla wrote:
EQ Next will most likely be casual in that you can play on an Ipad or in Unity. That's just the state of the genre. The new Star Wars game proved that the end is nigh for what we are used to thus far in MMO's.


Yes, the new Star Wars game that did numbers SOE can't even DREAM of approaching EVER (for various internal reasons).


TOR did really well in inital sales. It logged some 1.7 million units sold. They seem to be having retention issues though. They dropped some 400K subs so far this year (perhaps more.) I think the game has replayability issues. It's a great story driven game, but once you play thru the story, are you wanting to do it again? We'll see if it has the same staying power that EQ does, though I'm skeptical (licensing fees to LA are typically really high, so they need a fair number of subs just to cover that cost.)
#43 Jun 26 2012 at 2:31 AM Rating: Good
RiplyAnklebiter wrote:
"Ramianen"
I would agree with most of what you have to say, right up until the points about PvP. I am not a huge PvP fan but I have to admit it has its place in any "good" moderm MMO. The think the confusion people have about PvP'esk features is that it doesnt have to be a huge draw to players that would not normally play the game, it doesnt have to be fair, and it doesnt have to be prefect. In my oppinion PvP is more about something else to do with your time, while in game, when you need a break from other content. Will people forever complain about it? Abosolutely, just as they will complain about character models, and raid content, that is the nature of the beast, and is a bi-product of to many nerds with wayyyy to much time on their hands.

PvP should be in any MMO that is to be taken seriously, a Dev's goal with a MMO should be longivity and long time subscriptions, anything you can add that causes a player to stay in game when getting bored is a good addition to the game. It doesnt have to be perfect to work, but it does need attention. Heck the early days of Battle Ground in WoW were huge for players that needed a break from other content. Even in EQ1 where the only options we had to Dueling, and the rare areana fights, were very fun.

I would love to see EQNext incorporate some type of BG system, or even specific zone areas that were open PvP. This does not need to be a major part of the game, and should be completely avoidable by those that want nothing to do with it. But the option of PvP should be there. Again we are not attempting to bring in hardcore PvPers into an EQ sequal, but we do want those that are a little A.D.D in nature to have an outlet for their boredom, this is more about keeping players than it is about bringing in new players.

Edited, Jun 22nd 2012 5:49pm by RiplyAnklebiter


See, my only problem with this is the same thing I noted with regard to datamining. Players SAY one thing ('unbalanced PvP is fine, as long as it's there!') and then DO the opposite (avoid PvP because there are 'god classes' or 'exploit builds' that dominate). Also remember that if it's in the game, it must be maintained. No developer is going to leave an obviously faulty system to its own devices. They'd get skewered in the Court of Public Opinion (read: fansites). Bad press is bad, for attracting new revenue and even for retention.

My thought on PvP is, if you're not going to do it right, don't do it at all. Too many games have shipped with half assed PvP systems that then require revamping within the game's first year of existence. The developers used for those revamps could've been tasked with creating more much-needed endgame/higher end content, which tends to aid retention far more in this age of themeparks.

Sippin wrote:
I agree there's no real downside to including PVP in an MMO altho if it's obviously unbalanced the weaker classes will complain royally. But that's part of the game, as frustrating as it might be. And all the more rewarding if a so-called underpowered player manages to beat a supposedly overpowered player!

I also think BG would be a great idea in EQNext, especially if it allowed players from different servers to interact. (This might pose problems if they include FV-type servers, but cross that bridge when we come to it!)


There isn't a downside? If it's done in half ass fashion, it can bruise a game's reputation and attractiveness. Star Trek Online's PvP has been garbage for almost two years now. It got to the point where the developer had to admit it was trash. How's that look to the outside world? It was done in half ass fashion and one faction had its entire progression based on it (Klingons had almost no PvE content of their own. They had to level in PvP) on release. That plan had to be scrapped because it was impossible to support. Though Feds outnumbered the Klinks 12-to-1 at one point, few Feds were even interested in PvP. So with no one to kill, how do you level if you can only level in PvP?

Champions had the same issue and EQ1's PvP servers have never been particularly highly regarded.

I don't have a problem with PvP (as my four EVE accounts can attest to). I have a problem with PvP added on as an afterthought. I think it's detrimental to a game, on both a perception and a community level. Let's not act like PvP in games attracts the best and brightest, at least not when you consider forum communities. So people try PvP, run into one of these inbred mouth breathers, and it reinforces their initial opinion of PvP (or the stereotype of PvP) and can sour them on the game as a whole. This isn't news. The problem is, developers think they HAVE to include a PvP aspect, even if it's garbage, just for appearance's sake. Battleground/Warzone types of mechanics are fine, but often require double balancing (balancing classes/roles/specs for the larger PvE game and then going back and tweaking them for PvP purposes). I'm damn tired of having classes nerfed because of what they do in a part of the game I'm not even interested in. (Full dislosure: I only like zero sum PvP models. This "everyone gets a trophy for participating" garbage doesn't cut it for me in MMOs any more than it does in real life)

amastropolo wrote:
Remianen wrote:
Reyla wrote:
EQ Next will most likely be casual in that you can play on an Ipad or in Unity. That's just the state of the genre. The new Star Wars game proved that the end is nigh for what we are used to thus far in MMO's.


Yes, the new Star Wars game that did numbers SOE can't even DREAM of approaching EVER (for various internal reasons).


TOR did really well in inital sales. It logged some 1.7 million units sold. They seem to be having retention issues though. They dropped some 400K subs so far this year (perhaps more.) I think the game has replayability issues. It's a great story driven game, but once you play thru the story, are you wanting to do it again? We'll see if it has the same staying power that EQ does, though I'm skeptical (licensing fees to LA are typically really high, so they need a fair number of subs just to cover that cost.)


So, a game having 1.3 million subscribers is a "failure" now? People are making an awfully big deal about the server transfers. Tell me, how many MMOs launched with TWO HUNDRED servers? Once the "new game smell" wore off, it was bound to lose active players so having that many servers to begin with was stupid. But remember, this is the same company that launched Warhammer Online....which did the same damn thing! It annoys me that in their rush to copy WoW, they fail to copy WoW's launch example. Lots of queues, yes, but conservative estimates of servers needed and conservative rollout of new servers when needed. You want to funnel people to a small number of server communities and expand only. Contracting is seen as a negative, after all. BW's issue is, they're making the same mistakes they made with Warhammer and getting similar results. They're not producing content anywhere near as fast as they should be (as a story based MMO, stories are required to continue into infinity, after all). But I'm not willing to write the game off as a failure (or even an impending failure). I don't think Peter Moore was lying when he said they need half a million subscribers to break even. Hell, the IP will guarantee you that many! I want TOR to ultimately succeed because this business is very 'me too'. No one blazes new trails, they all follow formulas. EA poured ridiculous money into promoting this game. I live in New York City. I saw the TOR billboard in Times Square every day on my way to work. How many games have had that benefit? When's the last TV ad you saw for EverQuest (last one I recall was for EQOA: "It's time to slay the dragon"). EXTRA covered the TOR release party. How many games have been covered by the greater entertainment media? THAT is what I want to see more of. Promote your MMOs like you promote those stupid console games (which tend to come out a lot more often).

Human nature is such that we will complain more about stuff we dislike than praise/recommend stuff we do like. But if it's in our face, it's a conversation piece. I've seen more ads for mixtapes than I've seen for MMOs! Maybe some developer needs a street team? Smiley: tongue
#44 Jun 26 2012 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
Remianen wrote:

So, a game having 1.3 million subscribers is a "failure" now?


I'm not exactly sure where I said (or even remotely indicated) it's a failure.

Edited, Jun 26th 2012 3:42pm by amastropolo
#45 Jun 27 2012 at 8:48 PM Rating: Good
amastropolo wrote:
Remianen wrote:

So, a game having 1.3 million subscribers is a "failure" now?


I'm not exactly sure where I said (or even remotely indicated) it's a failure.

Edited, Jun 26th 2012 3:42pm by amastropolo


Yeah, that was my fault. Been reading too much Massively.

Retention issues aren't really worth worrying about in the first six months of release, especially when you're starting from such a high number. The issue with themeparks is, they tend to have a very high rate of churn. Sandboxes don't have that issue (or at least not in such an obvious fashion). Relatively few people leave a game and never return. It's like pouring a beer or a soda into a cold glass. You're going to have lots of suds and then after a while, it'll settle into its true volume. The same with MMO launches. They're having retention issues because the short attention span crowd can only play one character before they're "done". Once those people reached the end (easy to do in the free month in a themepark), they were gone.

But compare apples to apples. If TOR is having "retention issues", what about the games that preceded it? Did Age of Conan have retention issues after launch? Did Rift? Did any of the MMOs that have come out post-WoW have the same or greater number of subscribers six months after launch? If so, then TOR has a problem. If not, then this isn't a notable phenomenon since it happens to every game (especially every game based on a major IP). If someone told you, "They have less people playing six months after launch than they did at launch", what kind of look would you give them?
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 70 All times are in CDT
hexeez, Szabo, Anonymous Guests (68)